View Single Post
  #142  
Old 02-13-2011, 06:03 AM
Wolf_Rider Wolf_Rider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by julian265 View Post

For the Nth time, they were developing their own, then ceased at the request of NP. GET IT NOW?
what is the proof of this? if you mention DCS, then refer to my earlier question


Quote:
Originally Posted by julian265 View Post

There is no contradiction in Blackdog's post. FT does have its own API, in fact you can enable or disable each of the methods FT uses to output head pose data. If you only enable the FT API, then FT only uses it, and does not use NP's DLL. If you only enable PPJoy, then FT outputs the six axes to a PPJoy virtual controller, which looks to windows like a six axis joystick, which you then map to the head axes in the game... Again, without the NP DLL. DO YOU GET IT??? When games accept six the FT API, or allow the assignment of joystick axes to head controls, FT has no need for the NP DLL. It's only when the head control axes are mysteriously kept hidden (unlike EVERY other one used in games) that people tick the trackIR box, to make the game think it is receiving data from one. GET IT NOW?
There is a contradiction... read it again, and it looks clear by your own admission that FT uses the NP software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by julian265 View Post

Maths != software. Nice straw-man, by the way.
take that up with Blackdog, it's his entry

Quote:
Originally Posted by julian265 View Post
Again, yes. However it is relevant to your question that the installation of FT will install the NP DLL, which is only used if the trackIR interface is enabled. GET IT NOW?
no, you got it backwards there, matey That's not what I was enquiring about


Quote:
Originally Posted by julian265 View Post

Yes. There are also other free programs for dot tracking - but since games often don't expose the head control axes for assignment, they can't be used. This is really the only issue I care about. I don't approve of the FT devs using NP's protocol, however if NP is going to lobby for the prevention of all but the TIR interface, then I don't mind using it. GET IT NOW?
Once again, let's get some facts into the thread... what proof do you have that NP is lobbying for exclusion of other products? (go back to the first of your quotes here)

Last edited by Wolf_Rider; 02-13-2011 at 06:37 AM.
Reply With Quote